Day After Thoughts

[Alexander]

Actually, the defense wasn't abysmal. They just couldn't overcome a few mistakes by the offense.

Do you enjoy making up things as you go along so you make yourself sound right in your own mind?

They were average overall against a bad Cardinals offense and completely horrible on the one drive where even competent play seals an improbable win.

 

[theogt]

And if they did, you would find theogt, reminding everyone that they made the stop when it counted.

Why would I remind someone? Why would I even bring it up? Do you just go around making nonsensical statements all the time or is it just every now and then?

 

[theogt]

Do you enjoy making up things as you go along so you make yourself sound right in your own mind?

They were average overall against a bad Cardinals offense and completely horrible on the one drive where even competent play seals an improbable win.

Actually, no, they were better than average against the Cardinals. But thanks for playing.

 

[dbair1967]

Yeah, we've been over this irrational thought process over and over in this thread. Who held the Cardinals to fewer points -- the defense or the offense?

The offense dug a huge hole in the first half. The defense held them to 6 points in the second half. The only reason the team was even in the game was because of the defense. The defense had more to do with having a lead at the end of the game than the offense.

Say what? Talk about irrational arguments. The defense didnt force one turnover. We hardly ever had a short field. the offense did produce 26 pts and got the lead in the end, with a 3rd string QB playing for the first time ever.

The defense didnt even play that good. Depending on the other teams QB to miss wide open receivers, RB's falling down or bad snaps by the other teams center are not "good defense"

They didnt get sacks...they didnt get turnovers (save the one James was robbed of) we didnt do anything to confuse a guy who should have been overwhelmed.

 

[theogt]

Say what? Talk about irrational arguments. The defense didnt force one turnover. We hardly ever had a short field. the offense did produce 26 pts and got the lead in the end, with a 3rd string QB playing for the first time ever.

The defense didnt even play that good. Depending on the other teams QB to miss wide open receivers, RB's falling down or bad snaps by the other teams center are not "good defense"

They didnt get sacks...they didnt get turnovers (save the one James was robbed of) we didnt do anything to confuse a guy who should have been overwhelmed.

If the defense had performed as the average Arizona opponent performs (i.e., giving up about 19 PPG), we would have hever had the lead. The offense, however, performed at the level of the average Arizona opponent (i.e., scoring 26 PPG). Thus, the defense performing above average contributed more to the team being in a position to win than the offense.

Also... 14>13. LOL.

 

[dbair1967]

If the defense had performed as the average Arizona opponent performs (i.e., giving up about 19 PPG), we would have hever had the lead. The offense, however, performed at the level of the average Arizona opponent (i.e., scoring 26 PPG). Thus, the defense performing above average contributed more to the team being in a position to win than the offense.

Also... 14>13. LOL.

Dude, your hitting the bong or something today. I'm convinced of it.

 

[Alexander]

The defense didnt even play that good. Depending on the other teams QB to miss wide open receivers, RB's falling down or bad snaps by the other teams center are not "good defense"

Actually, I believe he calls that "better than average" defense.:laugh2:

 

[dbair1967]

Actually, I believe he calls that "better than average" defense.:laugh2:

He's doing what he always does here, arguing for the sake of arguing. He cant help himself.

 

[theogt]

Actually, I believe he calls that "better than average" defense.:laugh2:

This may come as a surprise to you, but the term "better than average" has some actual meaning. The Cardinals have played 14 other games and the Cowboys defense performed better statistically than the average of those opponents.

So, uh....yeah....pretty sure that means they were "better than average."

<insert smiley to solidify my point>

Oh, by the way, remember that time you said Amendola didn't belong on an NFL roster? Good times.

 

[Sarge]

I think Victor Butler is the guy opposite Ware we want.QUOTE]

Yep - I am little surprised more people aren't on to this. Good call.

 

[dbair1967]

I think Victor Butler is the guy opposite Ware we want.QUOTE]

Yep - I am little surprised more people aren't on to this. Good call.

I'd like to see more of him on the field, still dont know yet if he is the fulltime answer, but he definitely more explosive right now than Spencer is.

 

[DWhite Fan]

Again, if we don't throw one of the two pick sixes in the first minutes of the game, we win. Period, end of story.

Again, if Miles Austin and Roy Williams would learn to catch the football, the Cowboys win.

Again, if Jason Garrett had gone for two on the final TD Dallas' scored, the Cardinals need a TD instead of a FG to win. With our Defense, they probably would have gotten it anyway.

Again, if the Defense could find away not to give up a 4th and 15+ on Arizona's final drive, the Cowboys win.

Amazing, how many "agains" would have lead to a Dallas win. Such is the story of the 2010 season from hell